The Federal Supreme Court (STF) resumes this Friday (11) the trial that discusses changes approved by Congress in the Clean Record Law. The result could impact candidate campaigns that are being questioned in the Electoral Court.
The trial will resume with the vote of Minister Gilmar Mendes, who asked for more time to analyze the case in May.
The trial will resume with the vote of Minister Gilmar Mendes — Photo: Antonio Augusto/STF
The suspension occurred after the votes of the rapporteur, minister Cármen Lúcia, and minister Luiz Fux. They understood that the changes to the Clean Record Law, approved by the Chamber and the Senate, contradict the Constitution
One of the sections under debate reduces the period in which convicted candidates are prohibited from running, the so-called ineligibility. In practice, the rule reduced the punishment time for impeached politicians.
In the STF, there is an expectation that Minister Gilmar Mendes will present a divergence in relation to the rapporteur's understanding and open a new trend by voting for the validity of at least part of the changes, such as counting the period for ineligibility. Gilmar is critical of the Clean Record Law.
🔎There are still eight votes left, which can be entered into the Supreme Court's electronic system until the 18th. There is no impediment to another request for review, should any minister understand that they need more time to analyze the action.
Impacted campaigns
The ministers analyze an action by the Network against provisions of the law, such as the milestones used to count the eight-year period of impediment to participate in the electoral dispute.
In her vote, Minister Cármen Lúcia argued that the changes made by Congress and sanctioned by the Executive deflate the legislation, represent a setback and threaten the institution of ineligibility. The rapporteur defended the reestablishment of rules provided for in previous legislation.
The case's rapporteur, minister Cármen Lúcia — Photo: Luiz Silveira/STF
Cármen Lúcia said that the STF acts to rule out acts that impede, hinder or support administrative probity and public morality inherent to the republican regime.
"The changes carried out by Complementary Law No. 219/2025, relate to the initial terms and the counting of the period for purposes of ineligibility and establish a scenario of patent regression to what had been established as an instrument of guarantee of republican principles, administrative probity and public morality", assessed the minister.
Remember the changes
Deadline counting for parliamentarians impeached for breach of decorum or violation of constitutional rules
As it was in the Clean Record Law: ineligibility for the remaining term of the lost term plus 8 years;
As it was after the 2025 law: ineligibility for 8 years counting from the decision that decreed the loss of the mandate.
Deadline counting for governor, vice-governor, mayor and vice-mayor who lose their mandate for failing to comply with state or municipal rules
As it was in the Clean Record Law: ineligibility for the remaining term of the lost term and a further 8 years following the end of the term for which they were elected;
As it was after the 2025 law: ineligibility for 8 years following the decision that decreed the loss of the elective mandate.
Counting the term for people convicted by the Court, without the possibility of appeal or by collegiate decision
As it was in the Clean Record Law: the period of ineligibility, for all crimes provided for in the law, was counted from the conviction by a collegial body until the expiration of the period of 8 years after serving the sentence;
As it was from the law of 2025: the general rule stipulated was that of ineligibility counting from the conviction until the period of 8 years. In the case of crimes against public administration, money laundering, drug trafficking, racism, terrorism, torture, crimes against life and sexual dignity, heinous crimes, criminal organization and reduction to a condition analogous to slavery, ineligibility occurs from the moment of conviction by a collegiate body of justice until the expiry of a period of 8 years after serving the sentence.
How is the deadline counted for those who resign to avoid losing their position?
As it was in the Clean Record Law: presidents, governors, mayors and members of the Legislature were ineligible for the remaining period of the term for which they were elected and for the following 8 years;
As was the case with the 2025 law: presidents, governors, mayors and members of the Legislature are ineligible for 8 years following their resignation from office.
Limit period in case of ineligibility due to administrative improbity accumulated with another subsequent conviction
As it was in the Clean Record Law: there was no deadline;
As it was from the 2025 law: maximum period of 12 years if during the period of ineligibility due to misconduct there is another conviction that affects electoral capacity.
